Transcripts For CSPAN U.S. House Of Representatives U.S. House Of Representatives 20230323

host: must talk to ray and elizabeth city, -- let's talk to ray in elizabeth city. north carolina. caller: i agree with mr. good on this. parents have every right to children's education and he brings up an important point on what is happening with schools. questions previously postponed. previously votes will be taken in the following order. ordering the previous question on the house resolution 241. adoption of the house resolution 241, if ordered. and the motion to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 406. the first electronic votes will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the remaining electronic votes will be ducted as five-minute votes. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the vote on the order of the previous question on house resolution 241 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 8, house resolution 241, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 5 to ensure the rights of parents are honored and protected in the nation's public schools. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 219 and the nays are 204. the previous question is ordered. the resolution. on adoption of those in favor, say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. a recorded vote has been requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 218. the nays are 205. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the vote o the motion of the the gentlewoman from missouri and pass h.r. 406 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk wil report the title. the clerk: h.r. 406, a bill to provide for the treatment of the association of southeast asian nations as an international organization for purposes of the international orgization communities act and for other purposes. the speaker prtempore: the question is, will the house suspend the res andass the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 388. the nays are 33. 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, and the bill is the motion to reconsid is laid on the table. the house will be i order. the house will be in order. members, please take your conversations off the floor. for whaturpose does the ntlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the woman is correct. the house is not in order. members and staff, please take so we can continue with the loor business of the house. the houseill be in order. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition ms. foxxthank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 5. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. pursuant to house resolution 241 and rul 18, the chair declares the house in the cmittee of the whole house on the state of the union for the consiration of h.r. 5. the chair appoints the gentleman from nebraska, mr. flood, to preside over the committee of the whole. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on thstate of the union for the consideratio of h.r. 5 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: uni calendar -- the chair: the clerk will report the clerk: h.r. 5, a bil to ensure the rights o parents are honored and protected in the the chair: pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as read for the first time. the billill be controlled by the chair and rankinginority member of the committee on education and the workforcer their respective designees. the gentlewoman from nth carolina, ms. foxx, and the gentleman fm virginia, mr. scott, will each control one hour. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. foxx. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield myself such time as i the chair: so ordered. ms. foxx: mr. chairman, i rise today to recognize the profound importance of h. 5, t parents bill of rights act, and what it means for families across the country. over the pas several years, parents witnessed the consequences of lessons taught in classrooms firsthand. math scores declined by the largest mgin ever and reading scores plummeted to the lest levels in over three decades. these results are devastating. teachers unions and education bureaucrats worked to push progressive politics in classrooms while keeping parents in the dark. the parents bill of rights act aims to end that and shine a light on what is happening in schools. this bill wil reaffirm a parent's right to review course curriculum, meet with the child'seacher and be heard at hool board meetings without fear of reprisal. my colleagues on the other slside of the aisle are saying that this bill i this bill is punishing teachers or seeking to push a right-wing agenda. this is false. our education system is spiraling out of control as parents are pushed further outside of the classroom. this bill will restore the role of parents in schools and provide new mechanisms to provide parent-teacher partnerships. when parents are involved in their child's education, students thrive. that's the guiding principle of this bill. with the parents bill of rights act, republicans will help parents steer the education of their children back into the correct path where they can learn the skills they need for a lifetime of success. mr. chair, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise in opposition to h.r. 5 and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: so ordered. mr. scott: i rise in opposition to h.r. 5, the politics over parents act. republicans believe parental engagement is -- it is closely linked to student behavior, higher academic achievement and enhanced social skills, but unfortunately, the politics over parents act is not taking meaningful steps to increase or support parental engagement. in fact, it lists so-called rights and declares this allows the parents to control what is taught. but let's be clear. there's nothing in the bill to give parents right to dictate what their parents -- what their children are taught. instead, this bill is one of many attempts by republican politicians to give a vocal minority the power to impose their beliefs on parent -- on all parents and students. and this extreme education agenda has extreme consequences to parents and educators. more than 2,500 books were banned in schools during the school year 2021-2022 and nearly 140 additional books have taken effect since july, 2022. so let me just list some of the books that republican politics have gotten banned in the guise of parental rights. "diary of a young girl", the stories of a holocaust survivor by ann frank. "the kite runner" by khalid hossenit. "beloved" by tony morrison. and on and on, books like that have been banned because of efforts like what we have before us today. so let's be clear, these books are taught at age-appropriate levels. if we have a problem with it, you should call the librarian. but yet still, republican politicians are actually having them removed from classrooms and school libraries. simply put, the politics over parents act is an educational gag order across the nation which will prevent students from learning and prevent teachers from teaching. these efforts seek to score political points and scare parents into thinking that schools do not have their best interests at heart. instead, we should be talking about the support schools and families actually need to improve parental-teacher engagement. and so i urge my colleagues to vote no on the politics over parents act and join house democrats in an amendment in the nature of a substitute in delivering real solutions to build partnerships between schools and families. and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield three minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from louisiana, dr. letlow. the chair: the distinguished gentlewoman from louisiana is recognized. ms. letlow: i rise to join my voice with millions of american parents as the house considers h.r. 5, the parents bill of rights act. h.r. 5 is about one simple and fundamental principle -- parents should always have a seat at the table when it comes to their child's education. we believe that learning is a partnership between a family and their child's teachers. this bill is the vehicle by which we can put parents and educators together at the same table to have a productive dialogue. this bill is not complex or complicated, nor should it be partisan or polarizing. and contrary from what you may hear from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, it is not an attack on our hardworking teachers who will always be the heroes in my eyes. it is not an attempt to have congress dictate their curriculum or determine the books in the library. instead, this bill aims to bring more transparency and accountability to education, allowing parents to be informed, and when they have questions and concerns, to lawfully bring them to their local school boards. over the past two years, we've seen too many instances where rather than opening their doors to welcome parents and as partners, some schools instead slam them shut and said that government bureaucrats know what's best for our children. parents across this country have overwhelmingly spoken out that they have had enough. they want a seat at the table because at the end of the day, these are our children, not the government's. mr. speaker, i worked in education before i came to congress and i'm also a mom. i've seen firsthand how when you educate a child you give them a future. we know that when parents are involved, it is the students who succeed. we also know that when a family is shut out of their child's education, it will lead to disastrous results. mr. speaker, let us give parents that voice in the learning process. let schools open the doors and welcome them in as partners. and let us work together to build a brighter future for america's children. thank you. i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman the chair: the gentleman from vee is recognized. mr. scott: i yield 2 1/2 minutes to the ranking member on the higher education subcommittee ms. wilson. the chair: the gentlewoman is yielded 2 1/2 minutes. ms. wilson: thank you, mr. speaker. today i rise in opposition to h.r. 5. as an educator, i believe parent voices should be honored in schools, all educators believe this. but we know that this bill is not about that at all. we have always had parents involved in our schools, so stop being foolish and divisive. we always need their input. this bill is nothing more than a talking point of extreme maga agenda that will hurt children and hurt our schools. let's just face it, there has been a movement to limit public education since brown versus board of education decision. with the election of our president, it pulled the scab off a wound that never healed. now it is an open gaping wound and out of children. they are throwing everything, vouchers, excessive testing, banning books and now they are trying to drive a wedge and create an antagonistic relationship between schools and parents, how pathetic and dreadful. parents love teachers. everybody loves teachers. every parent remembers a teacher story. we are terrorizing the people who love our children, keep them safe and educate them over eight hours. our teachers are sack cry official lambs. we will fight you as long as it takes. this is all the little children who look like me have. public schools are the bedrock of this nation. let me tell you what a parent's bill of rights. i will tall it thou shall restore the tax credit. provide free breakfast and lunch, provide free kindergarten and put a nurse in every school, offer after-school activities, provide intensive counseling services, thou shall offer parents the right to improve their education and job skills. love and respect every child's individuality and every teacher should make a minimum of $60,000. i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from he -- virginia reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: i yield three minutes to the chair of the elementary and secondary subcommittee. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. >> should parents have the right to be involved in their child's education? that is the question before us. 72% of americans have answered yes to that question, parents should be and want to be involved in their child's education. and according to numerous studies, students who have involved parents have better behavior, better grades, better attendance and develop a lifelong love of learning which is the key to long-term success. but today american parents are fed up because they have experienced two years of school closures, misguysed -- misguided principles and focused on what is woke rather than essential academic education. they have been branded domestic terrorists for speaking out at school boards. some were arrested for having the nerve to plead with school boards. mr. speaker, it is time to rewelcome parents into education and parents have the right to know what's going on in american education today. that's why i encourage everybody to support h.r. 5, the parental bill of rights act that empowers parents and prioritizes the needs of students over entrenched special interest groups. today, this body has an extraordinary opportunity to reclaim the moral high ground in america and usher in a new era of k-12 that protects kids and expands educational freedom. americans, parents want to be that part and time to say yes and support parentsment i yield become. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: i yield three minutes to the the gentlewoman from oregon, ms. bonamici. the chair: the gentlewoman from oregon is recognized. ms. bonamici: i rise today in strong opposition to h.r. 5 which could be called the politics over parents. as a very involved public school parent, i can say that i strongly support parental involvement in scrags and you won't meet a member on this side of the aisle that disagrees with that. the bill today misses the mark. this could have been the opportunity to face the real challenges to make changes that would involve parents in a constructive way and make a positive difference in education and i'm disappointed we aren't doing that. house democrats are committed to providing all parents and those who face barriers with meaningful engagement in their kids' schools. it is clear tay the democratic party is the party of parental rights. we have put forward a plan that will increase the quality and accessibility of parental involvement and engagement in schools. a plan that is in evidence-based models that is shown to increase family engagement and student achievement, a plan that encourages parents to be partners not adverse areas. roots out discriminations based on sexual orientation or gender identity in our public schools and a plan that unlike h.r. 5 doesn't carry authoritarian encouraging book bans and discouraging curricula and leading to the micro management of educators. we welcome the education how to urge our friends on the other side of the aisle to abandon their motivated attacks on school teachers and students. we should be working on these issues. our nation's students and families deserve that. we need more parents to feel included, supported and engaged and welcomed at their kids' school and this bill does not even begin to do that. i'm leading on a bill of rights for parents and students that is supported by 250 education and civil rights groups and the national p.t.a. i have heard colleagues that history will judge us how we respond to the needs of students and families at this moment and i agree. will we succumb to a narrow minded public education agenda or work together to advance common sense meaningful policies that will support parents, students and educators? i urge my colleagues to take the approach that sees public education as the great equalizer for all students regardless of who they are. essential to the communities and democratic republic. join me in rejecting this bill. as i yield back, i want to introduce a statement from the national p.t.a. in opposition to h.r. 5. the chair: the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina -- for what purpose does did you rise. mr. scott: did the gentlelady's unanimous consent, was that recognized? the chair: that request is covered under general leave. the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson, also the chair of the agriculture committee. the chair: gentleman recognized mplets. mr. thompson: i -- rise in strong support. this is one of the promises we intend to keep. i know firsthand the importance of hearing from parents and encouraging them to be engaged in their child's education. it provides parents an expanded opportunity to engage with their children and the teachers who educate them. this bill implements clear, commonsense protections allowing parents to review curriculum information, academic standards and see how schools are spending our tax dollars. parents deserve the right to be heard and should be able to address the school board without fear of harassment or retribution. this bill includes simple probeses to keep our children safe to protecting their privacy and requiring to notify parents. as a graduate of the public school system, i know parental involvement is critical to fostering a successful educational environment. mr. speaker, quite simply, this bill is common sense. i urge my colleagues to support this legislation and ensures parents are at the center of their child's educational experience. and with that, i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: i yield two minutes, the gentleman from california, mr. tay can o'. mr. takano: i rise today in strong opposition to the politics of a parents act as a member p of the education and work force community and lgbtq and i'm a teacher and i know how important parental involvement. all parents including the parents of lgbtq kids have rights. they have rights to send their children to schools where they will be protected and free from harassment and given the opportunity to thrive. they have the right to be free from bullying and humiliation. and i ask unanimous consent to introduce into the record a letter from a million moms rising into the record. the chair: wombed. mr. takano: republicans have preached about the parent's god i've given rights. and children have a god-given right not to be physically or emotionally harm. children were outed by staff and as a consequence they faced severe punishment. one was beaten by his father and transferred out of the district after he was caught being affection nature with another boy. imagine that government requires them to out their student to an unsupportive family. i tell you. 73% of lings bets report anxiety, 40% of homeless youth are lings bets and they have seriously considered suicide. good teachers care about their kids and know that relationship with a parent is important but when a home is not safe, school becomes their safe place and teachers need to be their cheerleaders. this bill forces good teachers to do bad things. it outs kids and forces kids back into the closet. it is an invasion of privacy that puts children in danger. this is what republicans have chosen to spend our time and taxpayer dollars on, the so-called parents bill of rights is big government overreach that my colleagues proclaim that they are against and puts the cost of their pursuit of political gain on the backs of students and teachers. this is worse than simply bad legislation. it is concerted attacks on parents, children and teachers and i urge my colleagues to vote no on this bill. the chair: the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: i yield two minutes to the distinguished the gentleman from michigan, mr. walberg. the chair: the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. walberg: i rise in support of h.r. 5, the parents' bill of rights and thank representative letlow and chair foxx in defending the god-given rights of parents and protecting kids as well. education is paramount to students' success. we have seen a push by some to clued parents from their children's education. . . . parents bill of rights act to mitigate the issues we've seen nationwide and to support parents who need the support to do right by their kids as well. we believe on this side of the aisle, we believe this is the right way to go and we believe in the end it will promote education, family, and individualism as well. i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i yield 2 1/2 minutes to the gentlewoman from washington, a member of the committee on education and the workforce, ms. jayapal. the chair: the gentlewoman from washington is recognized for two minutes. ms. jayapal: mr. speaker, congress should be supporting parents, students, and teachers, not advancing this politics over parents act, which would punish teachers for giving history lessons, ban books, and sew hate and divisiveness among trans kids. parents have the utmost confidence in their children's teachers. when writing curricula, 70% trust their child's schools. but when it come to writing laws, political gimmicks like this one keeps them saying the same thing about this very body. instead of expressing outrage of curricula and books, 80% of parents would rather congress give free school meals and 79% want support for mental health services and in a survey of parents' top concerns by the pew charitable trust, 40% said they were extremely or very worried about their children struggling with depression. 35% said they were concerned about bullying and 22% were worried about their kids being shot. not a single one of those issues on the top list of parental concerns is addressed in this bill. so don't tell me this is a parents bill of rights. this is not addressing gun violence. it's not addressing mental health. it's not addressing childcare, pre-k, and all of the other things that would be a part of a parents bill of rights. instead, we're spending time on a bill that sews doubt about public education and our teachers and also targets our very vulnerable trans kids who are absolutely no threat to anyone in this body. please understand that the provisions in this bill that out trans kids are cruel and dangerous. i say that as a mom of a trans kid, and i was very embracing to my daughter when she came out but not every family is. the reality is 75% of trans kids experience discrimination and harassment. so why do republicans want schools to require outing lgbtq students? that does not make them better students. congress has a constitutional authority to write laws. what a mockery and betrayal of that duty would be to pass this stunt of a bill that doesn't address a single priority of parents, bans books, undermines teachers, and hurts our kids. democrats are the party of parents and families. we reject this bill and we commit for fighting for childcare, university pre-k and for a universal tax credit and people to be free to be who they are and express themselves. i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record two statements, one from the national education association and one from the american federation of teachers. the chair: without objection. ms. jayapal: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chair. i yield two minutes to the vice chair of the education and workforce committee, the gentlewoman from illinois, mrs. miller. the chair: the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. miller: thank you for yielding, chairwoman foxx, and thank you to my republican colleagues for taking up this very important bill. there's been a push by powerful teacher unions, left-wing politicians, and most concerning, the biden justice department, to silence parents throughout our country. the biden administration used the f.b.i., the most powerful law enforcement agency in the world, to intimidate parents for showing up to school board meetings to oppose biden's radical agenda. parents' rights are nonnegotiable. parents are the decisionmakers for their child's education, which includes their child's curriculum. parents want schools focused on reading, writing, and math, not woke politics. the radical left in our country seeks to silence parents and use public schools and colleges to indoctrinate our youth. they don't want to teach children how to think. they want to teach them what to think. i am grateful that several of my bills are included in the parents bill of rights to protect children from radical gender ideology and to ensure parents are informed when information is being collected about their children through surveys or documents. parents have the right to know what is being taught to their child and they have the right to opt their child out of any discussion about sexual orientation or gender ideology. i am proud house republicans are keeping our commitment to fight for parental rights, and i urge my colleagues to vote yes. thank you and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield two minutes -- 2 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from florida, mr. frost. the chair: the gentleman from florida is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. frost: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in opposition to h.r. 5. i rise in opposition as someone who's actually been a student in our public school system within the last decade. i rise as someone who's the son of a public school educator, special education teacher of 37 years. love you, mom. and i also rise as someone who sat on my local school board for two years as the student representative. this bill is modeled after one that i know very well. florida's parental rights in the education law. most of it know it as don't say gay. and don't say gay infringes on parents' right, including lgbtq+ and supportive parents. bills like this make schools more hostile. and make no mistake, it results in hate, bigotry and, yes, sometimes death of our students in schools. republican lawmakers won't even allow my amendment to be considered that protects the first amendment rights of parents. we want to talk about parental rights, what about their first amendment right to fight for their children, lgbtq+ children who are fighting for gender-affirming and lifesaving care? one of my colleagues brought this up, but this bill focuses on parents' rights but what about the rights of our students? what about the rights of our young people? why are my republican colleagues not advocating for our students? is it because they know that the majority of young people despice legislation like -- despies legislation like this and do not support legislation like this that's bigoted? is it this generation is the most progressive generation this country has ever seen because they want a world where everybody can succeed, where can he we see through the eyes of the -- where we see through the eyes of the most vulnerable. you see, the party is branded on freedom and liberties but what about the freedom and liberties of young people and students that actually sit in the classroom? if republican lawmakers scared so much what's happening in our schools, they would focus on feeding kids so we can ensure everyone learns on a full stomach. if republican lawmakers care so much what's happening in our schools they would make sure that students have updated technology, teachers have the resources they need so students can actually learn. if republican lawmakers cared so much what's happening in schools, what about the kids that are gunned down in their classrooms, the leading cause of death in this country being gun violence for young people? none of that is in this bill. this bill is just a vehicle for hate and political nonsense, pushing a chosen wedge issue. it's not about policy. it's about politics. it's not about freedom and liberty. it's about the fear of a problem that doesn't exist. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield one minute to the gentleman from florida, mr. mills. the chair: the gentleman from florida is yielded one minute. mr. mills: thank you, madam chair. thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to state the obvious. there's no room for woke ideologies, sexualization of our children and c.r.t. in our classrooms. the legislation before us makes a few things clear, but the main point is this. parents' rights matter. american citizens rose up and demanded a seat at the table when it comes to their child's education and curriculum and they did that by electing a g.o.p. majority in the house. so i think our leadership -- so i thank our leadership for bringing this legislation to the floor. as a father, i want to make it a priority that we state that parents can and should protect their children. this bill ensures parents have a voice. it's time to show the american people we stand with parents, not educational bureaucrats, who want to restrict our understanding and visibility of the issues. these parents are not to be labeled as domestic terrorists. they are proud parents who want their children to succeed and not to be indoctrinated and so i stand in great support of h.r. 5. thank you and i yield the floor. the chair: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield five minutes to the democratic whip, the gentlelady from massachusetts, ms. clark. the chair: the gentlelady from massachusetts is yielded five minutes. ms. clark: i thank the gentleman from virginia for yielding. and i ask unanimous consent to submit a letter from the leadership conference on civil and human rights into the record. the chair: the gentlewoman's request is covered on general leave. it's unnecessary. ms. clark: mr. speaker, i am the proud mom of three. altogether, i have 36 cumulative school years under my built. and i served on a school board for six of those fighting for parents and for kids. so i speak from experience when i call on this chamber to oppose the g.o.p.'s politics over parents act. once again, the majority has shown us how out of touch they are with american families. they are obsessed with wokism, even as they struggle to define what that even means. but let me tell you, parents in this country are wide awake. they wake up every day and do the best they can to provide for their families. they wake up and they want great schools where every single child can learn and excel. parents want affordable childcare. they know that's the beginning of a great education. right now parents are spending nearly a quarter of their family budget on childcare and that's when they can find it at all. congress had a chance to cut those costs for families. every single house republican voted no. that's politics over parents. parents know that building a better future means teaching our country's history. they know we have to address our teacher shortage, but demonizing educators, banning books like "to kill a mocking bird" -- "to kill a mockingbird" that's politics over parents. taking care of a sick child should not have to send that child to school sick because they don't have paid leave. but the united states remains one of the only developed countries in the world without paid family leave. every single house republican voted against this basic benefit. that's politics over parents. moms and dads want schools and communities be safe. they do not want their children shot while they were in school. just yesterday, denver families faced a horror of yet another school shooting. house republicans refused to enact commonsense reforms. why? politics over parents. how about something as basic as feeding our children? nope. house republicans voted against the child tax credit. they voted to slash food stamps and eliminate free school lunches. once again, politics over parents. and then there's the shameless hypocrisy. talking about parents' rights as the g.o.p. strips away americans' rights to decide if and when they are going to have children? at every turn, house republicans have undermined the rights, freedom, and well-being of our nation's families. let's say yes to parents and no to this shameful bill. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. grothman. the chair: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for two minutes. mr. grothman: it's interesting what we hear from the our side of the aisle. i'll have to depart from my prepared text to comment on what we are hearing. i always come back once put on the black lives matter website that they wanted to get rid of the western prescribed nuclear family. there is this hostility to traditional values that is seeping into the public schools today. we recently read a poll showing that people in the baby-boom generation, over 60%, are proud to be american. people under 25 are no longer proud to be american. where do they get this? they get this because some members of the schools, too many, can you hear it from that side of the aisle, are obsessed with racism. this in such -- people are coming here from all over the world. you have to be blind to think racism is a huge problem. their obsession over racism. the obsession over lgbtq. their hostility to guns. are all things that are pounding, pounding, pounding out of that side of the aisle and we don't like our kids having to pick up on that. when parents do show up, we have now found out that the f.b.i. may become involved they are so scared to death of parents sticking their nose into their own children's business. our country was made for a moral and religious people. instead the other side wants us to become a progressive group of people. whatever progressive stands for, i would have to say it's hostility religion and ever growing government where the government is more and more responsible for everything in society. it is vital that we assure, particularly in the age in which elected officials apparently side with the f.b.i. getting involved with parents who stick their nose in their children's life, it is vital we pass a bill today clarifying that parents do have the right to get involved in their children's education, and it doesn't matter what the president orders or allows the f.b.i. to do. thank you. the chair: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: i yield 2 1/2 minutes to the gentlewoman from new york, ms. ocasio-cortez. the chair: the gentlewoman from new york is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. miss kreadz: thank you, mr. chairman. i think we are seeing here today is the republican party's attempt to take some of the most heinous legislation that we are seeing passed on the state level to attack our transand lgbt, as well as people from marginalized communities right to exist in schools. this flowery language of quote-unquote, parental rights and freedom hides the sinister fact of this legislative text. if you notice in these arguments they are not really discussing what is actually in this legislation. it includes two provisions that require schools to out trans nonbinary, and lgbt youth even if it would put said youth in harm's way. one of the highest rates of youth homelessness is in the lgbt community from parents who want to kick their children out in households that may be unstable or abusive. for so many children of abuse school is their own safe place to be. but before they claim that this is not about banning books and not about harming the lgbt community, let's just look at the impacts of similar republican legislation that has already passed on the state level. look at these books that have already been banned due to republican measures. "the life of rosa parks." this apparently is too woke by the republican party. "song of solomon" is unacceptable to republican politics. 40% of banned books have reported are significantly addressing and specifically addressing lgbt issues. to say and talk about government reach and freedom, this is bill, this republican bill is asking the government to force the outing of lgbt people before they are ready. and talking about the rights of parents in this gallery today, the national parents union is here saying don't do this. i have a letter that i'd like to submit where they are asking the republican party to keep culture wars out of classrooms. our children need urgent and aggressive educational solutions of the the american library association coming out against this probable proposal. when we talk about progressive values, i can say what my progressive value is. and that is freedom over fascism. thank you very much. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chair. mr. chair, i yield four minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. the chair: the gentleman from texas is yielded four minutes. mr. moran: thank you, mr. chairman. first aid like to thank congresswoman letlow of louisiana for introducing this important piece of legislation. and chairwoman foxx for her steady leadership who guided the education committee through a 16-hour debate ending in a 2:23a.m. vote to pass this out of committee. this bill ensures that parents stay at the certainty of educating their -- center of educating their children regardless whether it occurs at home or the public school system or anywhere in between. until we can get the federal government completely out of k through 12 education, federal legislation shoring up the rights of parents is necessary. h.r. 35, known as the parental bill of rights, will keep parents and families at the forefront of their child's educational journey. it will also strengthen those critical partnerships between engaged parents and willing educators. and the beneficiary of such partnerships will undoubtedly be the school children nationwide. for generations our classrooms have been a sacred place, a place where children dig in to understand this world and how it works. where they discover their passions and reason for their creation, and where they prepare for a lifetime of pursuing those passions. i know this firsthand because before i entered my legal career i worked in the public school system. i married a pub libl educator. about nine years ago i helped to start and run and education foundation that supports the fabulous teachers in my local public school district who teach with innovation and passion. currently i have four children in the doors of that very school system. a choice my wife and i make. public classroom should not be a place for advancing personal agendas for political propaganda. the role of our public educators is to educate not indoctrinate. and although the majority of educators i represent understand this, it seems to me in other corners of this country, many others have foregoat gotten this or forsaken this on purpose. in either case, it requires action by this congress to stand firmly with parents and their partnership with educators. neither parents nor educators are the enemy. the enemy here is an unchecked system and political agenda that excludes one of those two essential parties necessary for the proper education of students. namely the parents. in 1925, the supreme court unanimously held that, quote, the parental right to guide one's child intellectually and religiously is the most substantial part of the liberty and freedom of a parent. so this concept is nothing new. we are talking about the fundamental rights of parents. parents should be at the center of the education of their children not the federal government. as a member of the house committee on education and the work force, will i continue to fight to keep the federal government out of our children's educational journey while working to increase the voice of our parents and families. as a member of that committee, i will also continue to applaud the dedicate the work of so many educators who have been doing the right thing by both parents and students for decades. for those educators in school districts this legislation changes little. for those who see parents as the enemy, this legislation changes much. under this legislation young and impressionable students will be safeguard interested propaganda and undue influential who have chosen to deef tatate from this responsibility to pursue a political agenda. nearly a century later after the supreme court weighed in on this issue, i'm proud to stand here in support 69 parental bill of rights -- of the parental bill of rights. to make the decision best for their families and their children's academic career. the chair: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: mr. chairman, i yield one minute to the democratic leader, the gentleman from new york, mr. jeffries. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. jeffries: i thank the distinguished gentleman from the great commonwealth of virginia for yielding and for his leadership. i rise today in strong opposition to h.r. 5. legislation brought to us by the extreme maga republicans that will put politics over parents. this legislation has nothing to do with parental involvement, parental engagement, parental empowerment. it has everything to do with jamming the extreme maga republican ideology down the throats of the children and the parents of the united states of america. house democrats believe that every single child should have access to a high quality, first rate education. house democrats believe that every single child throughout america should learn reading, writing, and arithmetic at the highest level possible. house democrats believe that every single child should be exposed to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics so they have the skills to succeed in the 21st century economy. house democrats believe that every single child in this great nation should have the opportunity to robustly pursue the american dream. and house democrats believe that the parents of this great country should have the opportunity to be involved intimately and engaged intimately in the education of their children. we take a back seat to no one on this issue. in fact, we put resources into making sure that parents have the opportunity to be fully involved and engaged in the education of their children. the other side of the aisle, the extreme maga republicans, have voted against legislative efforts to empower parents in our schools. a deeply personal issue for all of us. i'm the father of two sons. who are in public school. every step of the way. kindergarten, elementary school, middle school, high school. and parental involvement and parental engagement is critically important. it was for their journey, for their success, and we want that for every single parent in america. but what we don't want is the extreme maga republicans trying to tell the parents of america how to educate their children. how to raise their children. what books their children can or cannot be exposed to on their educational journey. that's what the politics over parents bill is all about. their educational agenda is pretty simple. they want to ban books. they want to bully the lgbtq+ community. they want to bring guns into classrooms. kindergarten and above. that's their educational agenda. they want to ban books about history. ban books about the american journey. ban books about the holocaust. ban books about slavery. ban books about the civil rights movement. ban books about the lgbtq+ experience. ban books about the native american experience. ban books about the latino experience. ban books about the asian american experience. ban books about our collective journey. as a great country, a gorgeous mosaic of people from all over the world who come here to pursue the american dream, that's what makes american exceptionalism so phenomenally important to our collective success as a country. and they want to take that away. from the parents of america. they have already banned, because of what has happened in several states, more than 2500 books in america. the highest number in recorded history. what kind of books have they banned? are these books dangerous to the education of our children? they are too numerous for any of us to go through during the time we have allotted for this debate, but let's go through a few of them. they want to ban a book called "mouse" it's about the horrors of the holocaust. an egregious crime against humanity that we should never, ever forget. six million jews exterminated. they want to ban "mouse." a book about the holocaust. what's so offensive in that book? let me read a passage. they took us from our papers, our clothes, and our hair. we were cold. and we were afraid. extreme maga republicans don't want the children of america to learn about the holocaust. what else do they want to ban? they want to ban a book called "i am martin luther king jr." there's a federal holiday in honor of martin luther king jr. what he meant to the country. the civil rights movement. the march toward a more perfect union. liberty and justice for all. equal protection under the law. free and fair elections. they want to ban a book "i am martin luther king jr." what's so offensive about this book? let me read a passage. in my life, people tried to tell me i wasn't as good as they were. just because of the color of my skin. when someone hurts you like that, it can be tempting to hurt them back. you must refuse. when someone shows you hate, show them love. when someone shows you violence, show them kindness. that's the book that they want to ban. "i am martin luther king jr." what else do they want to ban? they want to ban a book called "melissa", a book describing, in very personal terms, the experience of a trans girl. beginning to understand her identity. what's so dangerous about that? i was taught in my religion growing up in the cornerstone baptist church that we are all god's children. shouldn't we learn all about god's children? that's what my religion teaches me. what's so offensive about "melissa"? what's so offensive about this book? let me read a passage. her heart sank. she had genuinely started to believe that if people could see her on stage as charlotte, maybe they would see that she was a girl off-stage, too. extreme maga republicans don't want your child to learn about the lgbtq+ experience in america. that's not a decision that extreme maga republicans here in congress should make. the parents of america should be able to make that determination. what else do the extreme maga republicans want to ban? now, i grew up in america where we were taught whenever you are trying to identify something with this great country, well, there's nothing more american than baseball and apple pie. i'm sure if we searched hard enough, they want to ban something about apple pie. but today, we know they definitively have tried to ban a book about baseball, about roberto clemente, the first latino baseball player to make it into the hall of fame. why do they want to ban a book about roberto clemente? what are they trying to hide from you? let me read a passage from this book. he had no money for a baseball bat. so he made one from a guava tree branch. his first glove he also made from the cloth of a coffee bean sack. his first baseball field was muddy and crowded with palm trees. isn't that part of what makes america such a great country, that you can aspire to being part of what you see in front of you, in this case, baseball, young kid growing up in puerto rico -- by the way, part of america -- who decides he wants to be part of this great american pastime, but the extreme maga republicans want to stop your children from learning about the latino experience in america even when it relates to baseball and roberto clemente. one last example. i could be up here all day. what else do they want to ban? they want to ban a book called "the absolutely true diary of a part-time indian." which is about a native teenager's high school experience. what's more american than native americans? but they don't want your children to learn about native american history, experience -- what's so dangerous about this particular book? let's see. it says, we, indians, have lost everything. we lost our native land. we lost our languages. we lost our songs and dances. we lost each other. we only know how to lose and be lost. that's part of the native american experience in this country. that's part of reality. that's part of our journey. extreme maga republicans don't want the parents of this country to have the opportunity to decide for themselves whether the children of america should have an opportunity to learn about the native american experience. they want to jam their extreme maga republican ideology down the throats of the children and parents in america. that's unacceptable. that's unconscionable. and that's un-american. and that's one of the reasons why we strongly oppose this legislation. we'll fight against this legislation. we'll fight against the banning of books, fight against the bullying of children from many communities and certainly from the lgbtq+ community, and we're going to fight against your extreme maga republican agenda that has no interest in dealing with the education of our children, empowering them and offers up solutions like bringing guns into the classroom. we will fight against their efforts at banning books and bullying children and taking away the freedom of parents to make decisions on their own today. we'll fight against it tomorrow. we'll fight against it forever. and always stand with the parents and children of our great country. vote no against h.r. 5. the chair: the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, here's the truth about this bill. this bill will not ban any books. i repeat, this bill will not ban any books. what's dangerous right now is when people misrepresent what is in legislation before us. i now yield four minutes to my distinguished colleague, the chair of the higher education, workforce development subcommittee, mr. owens, the gentleman from utah. the chair: the gentleman from utah is recognized for four minutes. mr. owens: thank you, ms. chair. i rise in support of h.r. 5, the parents bill of rights. and as a father of six children and grandfather of 16 children, and i am the son of two educators. i know from experience that students succeed when parents and educators work together. between crippling learning loss, school closures and now teacher strikes, our kids have been through enough. they don't stand a chance if parents are kicked out of the driver's seat. moms and dads are the primary stakeholders in the child's education, not the government. period. they have a god-given right to be involved in their child's educational development, especially in the classroom. under the one-party democratic rule in washington, parents have been left behind, kept out of the classroom, and even labeled and targeted as domestic terrorists by the biden's d.o.j. in biden's ma america -- biden's america, parents come last. we're fulfilling our commitment to america by making sure moms and dads have a seat at the table. the parents bill of rights is just god good old -- is just good old-fashioned common sense. here is the right -- parents have the right to know what's being taught in school and see the reading materials. parents have a right to be heard. parents have a right to see the school budget and spending. parents have a right to protect their child's privacy. and parents have a right to be updated on any violent activity at school. unfortunately, this good old common sense, in committee 17 democrats opposed for protecting this god-given parent's rights. just remember, parental rights are nonnegotiable. i'm proud to vote yes on the parents bill of rights. i ask my colleagues to do the same. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from utah yields back. the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you. i yield 2 1/2 minutes to the gentlelady from texas, ms. jackson lee. the chair: the gentlelady from texas is yielded 2 flaf minutes -- 2 1/2 minutes. ms. jackson lee: mr. speaker, i want to adhere to the protocols of the floor. if i did not, i would shout from the rooftops as a mother and a happy grandmother that i champion parental rights and parents. i'm happy to have been one and to continue to be one, and i view the parenthood and parents rights as a cherished right. not one democrat would argue against that principle. in fact, there is no doubt that we as democrats have fought for parents and their rights. child tax credits should not be made permanent. taking care of additional childcare for those parents who are burdened. or for those who need housing to invest more so that children have roofs over their head and as well to ensure that no one is left alone looking for housing. but why i cannot support h.r. 5 is not because of my champion parents rights. before i came here in houston i was fighting with parents with the republican governor over a school district that has a rate of b. but i am against undermining nutrition against schools that is in this bill. i am against undermining vulnerable children such as transgender children. i am against banning books such as a book about a black astrol gist -- astrol geeist -- astrol gee -- stro -- asrtroligist, nelson mandela. i am against that. i want to make sure that parents wanted to have involvement of what their children learned. i'm against not wanting to hear the words of he willy weitzel about the holocaust who said -- don't we want our children to be kind? don't we want to know that slavery was wrong as i fight against slavery today that still exists? don't we want our children to understand the basis of all of our history, the mosaic of this nation, and african-american history? don't we want teachers to get the salaries they deserve? and don't we want to make sure that it's important, if you will, to ensure that our school buildings are repaired? that is why i want to -- the chair: the gentlewoman's time has expired. ms. jackson lee: want to submit into the record the first focus letter and i want us to know that in supporting parents' rights we must support, not destroying, public education and we must support the houston independent school district to not allow texas education -- to take over that school district. the chair: the house will come to order. the house will come to order. ms. jackson lee: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chair. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from colorado, mr. lamborn. the chair: the gentleman from colorado is recognized. . mr. lamborn: we have seen a push towards centralizing education by the government. a mentality seen too often with the left taking away those decisions from parents. this bill returns choice to the caretakers of our most precious resource, the next generation. why do we need this bill? we had a democrat politician running for governor in virginia and who lost who said, don't think parents should be telling schools what they should teach. can you believe that? i don't think parents should be telling schools what they should teach. republicans believe in education, especially when parents are in control. it is ironic that the left wing has censored or banned books. harry potter books have been burned because leftists don't like the author. left wing school districts in california have banned "of mice and men" and "to kill a mockingbird." this bill punts parents in control. and everyone who cares about the welfare of our younger citizens should support this bill. i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: mr. chairman, i yield 2 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from maryland, the ranking member of the oversight committee, mr. raskin. the chair: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. raskin: thank you, mr. chairman. we oppose h.r. 5 because we stand with the school boards and p.t.a.'s and parents and teachers, the students, and 13,000 school superintendents whose letter opposing this legislation i now ask unanimous consent to submit for the record. the chair: the gentleman's request will be covered by general leave. mr. raskin: we stand with local governments against this outrageous power grab by maga republicans in washington who are supporting book banning, suppression of historical facts about slavery, jim crow segregation, and racial violence, and favoring topdown micromanagement of our local schools across america. is there really a problem for parents like us with finding out what's in our public school libraries? before you pass a massive new federal law, and a massive new unfunded mandate for a local government, why don't you take the time to make a phone call. that's what i did. i called up the person who runs the school libraries for montgomery county, maryland, which has more than a million people there. and i learned from andrea who oversees the media centers for our concounty, that the entire catalog of 2.2 million books is online, freely available, and current as of today. anybody can go online and find it right now. if all the info is out there as local governments want it to be, then what is this about? well, it's about book banning, of course. two years ago more than 1600 books were banned in the united states of america. here are three of the key books that the right wingers have been going after. "the kite runner." about the dangerous fanaticism authoritarianism and abuse of the taliban. right wing religious fundamentalist movement all about censorship and repressing women's control over their own bodies and their owner if tillity. "the handmaid's tail" the extraordinary distaupian novel about a right wing movement which uses high technology and debraved -- depraved religious ideology to control not only the minds of their followers, but the private and public lives and ther if tillity of women -- ther if tillity of women. and of course, george orwell's "1984" they have no sense of irony. mr. chairman -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. raskin: we need more politicians reading books in america and fewer politicians trying to censor books in america. it is amazing to me -- thank you, mr. chairman. it's amazing to me to see politicians who oppose a universal violent criminal background check and who defend assault weapons after the massacres at columbine, after parkland, florida, after sandy hook in newtown, connecticut, after uvalde, after santa fe, texas, they are now going to keep america's children safe by banning the "hand made's -- "handmaid's tail." we can do better for children in america. the chair: the gentleman from virginia reserves. the in just a moment north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chair. i yield time to mr. lawler for the purposes of a colloquy such time as he may consume. mr. lawler: thank you, madam chir. i appreciate the opportunity to address a technical issue i have on the bill. first let me say i have been a strong supporter of the parents bill of rights. believe this bill gives parents much needed certainty that they will have transparency in their child's education. simply put, this bill guarantees all parents a voice in the decisions that affect their children and a seat at the table. it makes clear that you do not relinquish your rights as a parent simply by sending your child to a public school. among the bills' main components, parents have the right to know what their children are being taught. parents have the right to be heard. parents have a right to see the school budget and spending. and parents have a right to protect their child's privacy. and parents have a right to keep their children safe. some say this is already the case. this is just codifying. if that's the case, then great. we are codifying into law the ability and the rights of parents. these are important safeguards that not only ensure parents' rights, but they also respect state and local control of our schools. it does not get into what is taught in schools. what books or materials are used. or how a school should address a given issue. those decisions are still left to the state and local school districts. in addition, when it comes to their child's health and well-being, parents have a right to know if a school employee acts to treat, advise, or address issues of cyber bullying, bullying, hazing, mental health, suicidal ideation, or self-harm, possession, or use of drugs, eating disorder, or if a child brings a gun to school. there is also protections included in this bill that require parents to be involved if their school takes action to change their child's gender marker's pronounce preferred name or make sex-based accommodations for locker rooms or bathrooms. i recently met with constituents from the lgbtq+ community in my district, including trans youth and parents. they raised several concerns about this language. concerns primarily focused on the safety and well-being of these youth, especially trans youth. so dr. foxx, i'm hoping you can clarify some of this for me and for the record. does the bill require teachers or school officials to disclose the sexual orientation of a student or statements made by the student about his or her gender identity? second, will students still have the ability to speak with teachers, advisors, or school officials without fear that those conversations will be subject to disclosure? finally, will states and local school districts still be able to come up with their own policies and best practices for informing parents about these issues so as to ensure the well-being and safety of their child? ms. foxx: i thank the gentleman from new york for his questions. i can confirm, confirm, that the bill does not require teacher to disclose any of the information that he described. the bill does not address a student's identity or statement, but is solely focused on notifying parents on actions taken by school personnel to act on a gender transition such as changing pronounce or switching locker rooms. i would add, despite the claims from my friends on the other side of the aisle that even "the new york times" acknowledge that this is not a partisan issue. writing in january that, quote, parents of all political persuasions have found themselves unsettled by what schools know and don't reveal. our bill enshrines commonsense transparency for parents of children to reflect these concerns. but it does not force any teacher to reveal private conversations or any information about sexual orientation. the legislation is also clear that education is largely the responsibility of the states and any state or local school district would work with the department to ensure their compliance with these provisions without violating student privacy. >> i thank the chair woman for her clarification. i yield back. ms. foxx: i reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: mr. chairman, i yield myself 30 seconds. mr. chairman, on page 8 of the bill it says that the right, the parents have the right to know if a school employee or contractor acts to quote change a child's gender markers, pronounce, preferred name, allow the child to change the child's sex-based accommodations including locker room and bathrooms right to know. if a school employee acts to treat, advise, address the cyber bullying of a student. treat aadvise -- this has -- it doesn't say their own child. it says a child. i'm not sure what the answer was. i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentlewoman from minnesota, mrs. craig. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from minnesota is recognized -- the chair: the gentlewoman from minnesota yielded 1 1/2 minutes. mrs. craig: thank you, mr. speaker. , i support parents' rights. and i'm proud to live in the state of minnesota where parents have the right to remove their child from a class assignment if they are not comfortable with the subject matter. that is state law today in minnesota. i hear from parents across minnesota second district every day who are worried about their children. and i hear from teachers every day who need more support and resources for their students. there are more than 800,000 public school students in minnesota. i don't think washington politicians, the people standing here on the house floor, today, should mandate which books are in their school libraries. i don't think washington politicians should mandate their parent-teacher conference schedules. i don't think washington politicians should mandate whether these 800,000 kids get the mental health support they need. let's be real about what this bill is actually about. this is about maga republicans who want to start a fake culture war, targeting some of the most vulnerable kids in america in our kids' classrooms. shame on you. if you want to support parents, let's fully fund our public schools and sharpen our focus on special education programs. let's figure out how we recruit and retain talented teachers. let's get our kids and educators the mental health resources they desperately need. and let's leave the power to decide -- the chair: the gentlewoman kwr50e8ded -- yielded 30 seconds. miss raise: let's leave the power to decide what's bet for students at the local level. mr. speaker, i support parents' rights. but this bill has nothing to do with that. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to introduce for the record a letter expressing serious concern with this legislation from the national association of school psychologists. i yield. the chair: the gentlewoman's request will be covered bien leave. the gentleman from virginia reserves. the the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chair. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from georgia, mr. allen. the chair: the gentleman from georgia yielded two minutes. mr. allen: thank you, madam chairman. mr. speaker, there is no question over the past several years we have seen parents being denied the right to make the decision about their children's education. i don't quite understand the argument from the other side. the reason i stand before this body today is not because i happen to be in washington, it's because i'm representing parents in my district who want to know what their children are being taught and what they are required to read. in fact, parents in -- across this country, certain groups, have gone so far as to label the parents domestic terrorists. just because they wanted to say in their children's education. that's what we are talking about today. it's giving control back to the parents of our children. folks, this is not the way our education system was created, and it's not the way it's supposed to work. allowing families have a say in their child's education should not be a controversial subject. i don't get it. parents have a right to know what is being taught to their children, to give consent for medical evaluations, and to be heard. my goodness, it's in the top 10. honor thy father and thy mother. unfortunately, we see washington democrats, now it's a group to radically reshape our education system, by injecting divisive concepts and curriculum into our schools and classrooms regardless of whether families approve. house republicans are working to fulfill our commitment to america by building a future that's built on freedom, for crying out loud. a future where parents' rights are protected and they're giving a seat at the table. i'm calling on all my colleagues to join me in supporting h.r. 5, the parents bill of rights. thank you and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: mr. chairman, my i inquire how much time remains on each side. the chair: the gentleman from virginia has 29 minutes remaining. the gentlewoman from north carolina has 31 minutes remaining. mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield 2 1/2 minutes to the gentlewoman from florida, ms. wasserman schultz. the chair: the gentlewoman from florida is yielded 2 1/2 minutes. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. chairman. i rise in strong opposition to h.r. 5, which we should really call the politics over parents act. as a mom of three, let me be clear about what this legislation would do. it opens the door to gagging educators, parents, and students and turns classrooms into archaic tools for a vocal extremist minority. worse, it undermines what any mother wants for her child -- a supportive classroom space that provides a fact-based education and practical life and critical thinking skills. just look at the colossal education nightmare unfolding in my home state of florida right now. governor desantis and his stooge florida lawmakers prohibits girls from discussing their menstrual periods with one another while in school. they are already banning books and they are borrowing certain elements of african-american history from being taught in school. governor desantis and his radical allies are working to marginalize florida's lgbtq+ history and others they deem unworth. the republican rerival of the laugh endar -- laugh dar -- lavendar law, and like a cancer, this hateful law has spread with republicans now censoring educators on a wide variety of topics. so it's no surprise my colleagues across the aisle want to export these same dangerous policies across america. make no mistake. h.r. 5 undermines teachers and instead of offering students more support, it effectively denies it. the result of this law in florida has cleared bookshelves and canceled course work and an a.p. exam on african-american history. as a mother whose children attended public schools, i speak for millions of moms when i say, all we want for our children is the safe learning environment that ensures they discover the wider world and not force them to grow into narrow-minded, ignorant adults but this legislation hands a vocal extreme of parents the power to dictate what every child learns. and to all my business-friendly americans, all those that move to censor and ban leaves our children less competitive on the global stage. mark my words. take it from this mom, we should unite classrooms where every child get the resources and support they need to succeed in the 21st century. and mr. chairman, with that, i ask unanimous consent to enter the letter from the first focus campaign for children into the record, and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman's request is covered by general leave. the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chair. i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from oregon, ms. chavez. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. chavez: derecommender -- ms. chavez-deremer: we must place an enormous amount of trust to do what's best for our children. but at the end of the day, nobody will understand a child's interest and needs more than the people who love them most, their parents. so it's easy to understand why parents want to have and deserve to have the right to know what's going on inside the classroom. it is their responsibility. that's why we need the parents bill of rights, to help students succeed by ensuring every parent can voice in their child's -- can have a voice in their child's education. during the committee markup on this bill, i was honored to lead two proposals that are now included. one will help parents better understand the priorities of their children's school by bringing much-needed clarity to school budgets. the other sets both parents and teachers up for success by simplifying the curriculum feedback process. my process is built on two of the core principles of the parents bill of rights. parents have a right to know what their children are being taught and parents have a right to see the school's budget and spending. i will always fight to protect parental involvement and to put parents first. i'm proud to support the parents bill of right. and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from kentucky, mr. mcgarvey. the chair: the gentleman from kentucky is recognized for two minutes. mr. mcgarvey: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in opposition to h.r. 5, a bill that promotes conflict over clarity, callousness over kindness, and politics over problem solving. i'm speaking today not just as a member of congress but as the parent of three young children, two of whom attend public schools in louisville, kentucky, and one who will be soon. parents should be involved in their kids' education, in everything from school board elections to the p.t.a. to communicating with your child's teacher on what's going on. we received a message this morning from our kid's teacher letting us know there would be no band because of the fifth grade musical. but this bill is about impedement, not involvement. the reason the american library association opposes this bill is because h.r. 5 clearly opens the door to deprive our kids a fact-based education and it's part of a larger effort to ban free expression and ideas in the classroom. even cato thinks it's unconstitutional. like a lot of parents, we had to step up and teach some during the beginning of the pandemic. it wasn't easy. and i can assure you that curriculum should be ultimately determined by experts, not untrained individuals with extremist views. in addition to restricting parents' rights, h.r. 5 hurts some of our most vulnerable kids in the lgbtq community. why? according to the trevor project, one lgbt youth attempts suicide every 45 seconds. 45 seconds. why? why are we being more cruel? i believe that not just in politics but in life we're judged by how we treat those on the margins. so my message to my colleagues is simple -- stop being mean to kids. we can be involved and be inclusive. normally we want our -- warn our kids about bullying in the classroom. we shouldn't have to warn them about bullying from adults, too. the chair: for what purpose does the chairman rise? the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chair. i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from mississippi, mr. guest. the chair: the gentleman from mississippi is yielded 1 1/2 minutes. mr. guest: mr. speaker, in many places across our great nation, parents are being denied, being denied a voice and discussions around what their children are being taught in schools. as republicans in our commitment to america, we made a promise, a promise to establish the rights of parents, to protect their children from indoctrination in our classrooms. as a product of the public school system and father of two sons who graduated from public school, i understand the significant role our schools played in the education of our future leaders. however, far-left ideas have seeped into america's classrooms and have blurred the line between education and indoctrination. we cannot allow that to continue. this bill simply protects the rights of parents. the rights of parents to know what their children are being taught. what their children are hearing in school. the right to see the budget that the school is spending. the right to protect their children's privacy and the right to keep their children safe. simply put, this bill protects those parents who want to play a role in their child's life and to protect their children from indoctrination in the complas room. i encourage -- in the classroom. i encourage all my colleagues to support this critical and commonsense piece of legislation. thank you and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from north carolina -- the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i yield one minute to the gentlewoman from virginia, the newest member of the house. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. >> i have near darrell conversations with the -- i have near daily conversations with the parents in my district about their hopes and concerns and i can assure you they have a seat at the table in the school room and they are not concerned with banning books, censoring our curriculum or dictating what bathrooms student use. parents want increased resources for mental and behavioral health services, inclusive school environments that foster critical thinking and repairing outdated and crumbling school buildings and address security issues. they want their children to learn a complete and accurate history of our country and our world. ms. mcclellan: and they want the peace of mind that their children are safe. three days after my son stood with me on this floor and watched me take the oath of office, one of his classmates shot himself accidentally with an unsecured gun. and he died. it was a devastating loss for our community -- mr. scott: an additional 30 seconds. the chair: you are yielded an additional 30 seconds. ms. mcclellan: it was a devastating loss for the community and the community at large. these are the issues that parents are talking about, but h.r. 5 does nothing to address these priorities but create unnecessary reporting requirements and divert critical resources away from meeting the real needs of our students and family. i urge our colleagues to vote no on the politics over parents act and i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. chair. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. meuser. the chair: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for two minutes. mr. meuser: thank you. i appreciate the esteemed gentlelady from north carolina and for allowing me time here. i rise in strong support, mr. speaker, h.r. 5, the parents bill of rights. as parents, we put trust in our local schools and teachers and expect our children are receiving the appropriate education and in most cases they do. we all had great teachers that positively impacted our lives and our children have. and we're very grateful for that and we'll remember them forever. but in recent years for varying reasons, there have been well-known instances where the trust between schools and parents has been eroded, in fact, broken, and primarily those issues stem from parents being excluded or having their participation in the educational process removed, such as curriculum review being very limited. everyone agrees that such instances, whether they occur or infrequently, should not happen and when they do they're unacceptable. as a father, i know that to a mom and dad there is nothing more precious than their children. and being included in the education process should be a parent's right, especially as taxpayers, and any rational adult, whether parent or educator, knows what the reasonable level of involvement should be. parents should have the right to be heard and to know what their child is being taught. parents should have the right to see the school budget. parents should have the right to be alerted if there are instances of violence or problems in the child's schools. and parents are not asking too much. they're simply asking to be involved, which helps create a strong family and a better educational environment for all. it is our responsibility as elected officials to honor their requests and guarantee they will be included in the education process and school activities. that is why republicans -- this republican majority has put forth the parents bill of rights, and i urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. and i do yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: mr. chairman, i yield myself 30 seconds. mr. chairman, i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a statement from equity minded education, civil rights and immigration advocates on h.r. 5 that concludes that we urge congress to focus on real and meaningful efforts to truly support our students, parents, and teachers, and to stop using parents as a decoy to launch political attacks on our schools. and another letter from protecting parents to make the best decision is a fundamental american value. this proposal is a serious distraction from what our students need right now to be learning in a safe environment that engages families and teachers in true partnership to support students. the chair: the gentleman's request is covered under general ohio. >> i rise in opposition to this controversial and highly dangerous bill h.r. 5. i am a former teacher and my parents were teachers. i have been doing child advocacy and my wife and i are parents of two public school children right now. this is our lives. this is what we do day in and day out. i want to be very clear so my colleagues understand my rights are which all parents in america have if their children are in public schools. i can go speak to the school board whenever i want. i have that right, madam speaker. i can ask about the books. i can ask about the budget and get information about the medical condition, information with my children. i have that right right now. my colleagues have to know this. if they didn't, this is news to them, they can pull the bill because right now, this new national ban and set of controls will simply lead to our schools, our teachers and many of our parents drowning in lawsuits. i offer two amendments one was a litigation shield to help protect our folks from obvious, dangerous lawsuits that will come of this if this bill were to pass. the second was to opt out. if a district does not want to be part of this because i believe in local control as do most of the people in my district, republicans, democrats and independents, let school districts opt out. but it's not about local control. this is about taking a small teeny ideology and forcing it on the rest of us. and as a parent, i can say on behalf of see him parents -- so many parents, leave us alone. leave us alone. we need -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you. we need politicians at the state level and d.c. politicians to get out of our lives, get out of our doctorso offices, get out of our classrooms and let me parent my child. please, i urge my colleagues to vote no on h.r. 5. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman reserves and the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: i reserve. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. and the gentleman from virginia is recognized. scotd scott thank you, mad -- mr. scott: , thank you madam chair, i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from oregon. ms. bonamici: today the national parents' union released a new poll that supports an alternative version of h.r. 5 and does not support h.r. 5 in the least. the majority of people believe that the bill of rights should guarantee that students have access to support individual needs. the overwhelmingly agree that personal beliefs should not prevent other students from accessing curriculum and material. the majority encouraged teaching women's history, black history, latino and latina. majority want congress to provide students with career and technical education and academic tutoring. they rank requiring public schools to provide parents as the least important priority for congress compared to other issues. they say public schools should discuss concepts kindness, empathy, and collaboration. and colleagues, 90% say students should have access to well-rounded education. 90% say students should be protected from any form of discrimination. 89% say students should be taught using educational materials that are historically accurate and reflect the diversity of the united states. 83% students should be taught about how government works so they can be prepared to participate in democracy. h.r. 5 misses the mark. please, vote it down. i will be offering a substitute amendment. we have something we can stand for that will really truly address the needs of students and parents. i would like to introduce into the record a letter from the council of the great city schools in opposition to h.r. 5. and i yield back. the chair: that request will be covered under general leave. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: i recognize myself for such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: while working on this bill i have heard from parents' groups who have offered their support. i would like to mention what a few of them said. the independent women's voice wrote, the parents' bill of rights act acknowledges parents' fundamental rights to make decisions for their children. parents simply do not turn their children over to government schools with the assumption that schools make the decision without parental input. as parents we have the right to direct the upbringing, care and education of our children. the concerned women for america legislative action committee said, americans have been awakened to the troubling fact that public schools are failing our children. the lack of educational standards combined with the radical ideologies being taught in the classroom have led more and more parents to question the public education system. this act reaverts the proper role of parents in their children's education. finally, parents defending jetion -- action said, there is a universal lack of transparency and accountability among school districts. concerning events are major and widespread. the parents' bill of rights act introduced by julia letlow addresses the issues that parents have vocal liesed. academics, free speech, safety, fairness and transparency. we hope congress will be receptive and vindicate parents who have spoken up and yes or no for such -- yearn. this bill gives parents what they want. polling shows that overwhelming majorities of parents want more control over what their children are taught. according to survey results, 72% of americans support curriculum transparency. additionally, 67% believe that parents should be able to opt their children out of curriculum they believe is inappropriate or harmful. nearly eight in 10 parents polled nationally want to have influence over what is in taught in k-12 classrooms. i reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves and the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: madam chair, i yield four minutes to the the gentlewoman from connecticut, a former teacher of the year, ms. haze -- hayes. >> i rise in strong opposition the politics over parents act. one of the most dangerous provisions of this bill is the banning of books. across our nation books that illustrate our diversity are being pulled from library shelves. according to index of school book ban of the 2500 books banned, 47% of these books address lgbtq themes and they have prominent characters of color. they say nothing will ban books or sensor libraries. i invite them to support my amendment which ensures this legislation will not go into effect until the comptroller general of the united states can confirm that the bill will not lead to sensorship or ban books for children. throughout history, the voices of women, persons of color and members of the lgbtq community have been suppressed. their voices, experiences and stories have been labeled controversial, sexual and un-american. as a teacher, you do not get pick the parts of history. when i was a teacher i told the entire story honestly the good and the bad and gave students the tools they needed to participate in their communities in a conscious yows and productive way. my son is currently reading "to kill a mockingbird." one fort books banned. he said mom, they use the n word a lot and i don't like it. but it opened the broader conversation beer segregation jim crow laws and let him ask difficult questions of me. in his final observation of harper lee's novel, he said, but yet and still, he defended tom robinson. through his complex story, his takeaway was not hateful, hurtful orangery it was that even then good people existed. that's what books do. that's how kids learn, not through sensorship. teachers do not have the autonomy to indoctrinate students. everything we are talking about here today is published. budgets are public, curriculum are public, parents are being a part of our classes, when i was introduced by the ranking member, he mentioned that i was the national teacher of the year. that doesn't happen without parent-teacher partnerships. this bill will not improve educational outcomes. this bill caters to a small group of individuals who seek to impose their world views on entire school districts on my child. i ask unanimous consent to add the text of this amendment to the record. i would encourage my colleagues to oppose this bill and i yield back. the chair: that will be covered under general leave. the gentlewoman yields. and the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam chair. i yield myself 15 seconds. i'm going to say again and again and again and again, this bill does not do anything to ban books and my understanding is the book "to kill a mockingbird" was banned by a liberal school board in california. don't plame us. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. >> let's lay out the fundamental rights of parents. that's what we are discussing here today. number one, every parent should be given a choice and a voice on how their child receives an education. number two, school curriculum should not be used to politically indoctrinate our children. and number three, parents deserve options. they deserve a choice on how their child receives an education. in my family, my wife and i made a personal decision to whom school our children. every parent should be free to make that choice not just the wealthy ones. so what are the parents' bill of rights? what are the pillars of this bill? well, parents deserve the right to know what's being taught in schools and seeing the reading material. parents deserve to be heard. parents deserve the right to see where the taxpayer dollars are going, how they're spent and being used. it's a fundamental preliminary of good governance. parents have the right to protect their children, to protect their children's privacy. and parents absolutely should be updated and informed in the instances of violence that seem to be increasing in our schools, many of which go unreported. i am very honored to be a member of the house committee on education and work force and to support this bill, to support parents, support parents' rights and particularly that our children get the best possible education. this is a significant step forward. thank you. . . mr. scott: madam chair, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: mayor chair, i want to -- madam chair, i want to get back to something that was said earlier. this legislation on notice of rights that people have a right to information about their child, their child, their child. you have a right to notice before a person speaks to their child at a class, school assembly, or any other school-sponsored event. if you have a field trip, i guess you get to -- you have a right to notice before anybody at the museum can speak to your child. but under subsection l it says you have a right to know if a school employee or contractor acts to change a minor child's gender marker, pronouns or preferred name. that means any child -- any teacher addresses any child, you have -- everybody a right to notice. if they change their minor child's gender markers, pronouns or preferred name. i just think that's concerning. i don't know what is meant by that. but that's the way it reads. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman reserves. and the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam chair. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from kra, mr. -- from california, mr. kyly, a member -- mr. kiley. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. kiley: los angeles unified has shut down for the week. parents have no place to send their kids to school. sadly, they had to get used to it. this dysfunctional district and its union have lurched from one strike, one shutdown to the next. and seized on co-vid -- covid-19 to close schools indefinitely. kids were gone from school a year and a half in some instances. even when schools resumed, they had a zoom in the room setup, a teacher instructing from a laptop sitting in the classroom. the resumption of class was anything but normal. you had kids forced to each lunch on a gymnasium floor. the district then imposed an illegal student vaccine mandate that the courts had to intervene and strike down. and by the way, this was a failing school district even before covid, on the brink of bankruptcy with students testing several years behind grade level. they have the lost the right to control their child's education at the hands of a corrupt educational establishment being driven by student success than by special interests and social agendas. today's parent bill of rights is a desperately needed course correction, shifting the paradigm of public education in this country back towards one that is student-centered and parent-directed. my addition to this legislation is the school choice the gentlewoman from amendment. -- the school choice amendment. the only kids who are not at home right now are the -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. ms. foxx: i yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds. mr. kiley: the only parents that are at home are those that have the resources or the time or wherewithal to go to a charter school. my amendment will enable more parents to do the same, to find a path that better serves their child. this will not only increase the educational outcomes of particular students but induce the systemic change that we need to better all students. thank you and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields and the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, madam chair. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: and ask unanimous consent that a list of groups that either oppose or express concerns about h.r. 5 over 225 different organizations be inserted in the record. the chair: that will be covered by general leave. mr. scott: thank you. i yield back. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. and the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam chair. madam chair, i will respond to a comment that my colleague on the other side of the aisle mentioned a few minutes ago. i'll point out that the manager's amendment that we will debate clarifies the intent of the language the ranking member was reading. the mappinger's amendment -- the manager's amendment makes it clear that the school district's responsibility is to the parent's child, not any child. and with that i reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. and the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: in that case, madam chair, the individual child will be identified and will be essentially outed. and that's even worse than the underlying language. i'll reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. and the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: madam chair, i'd like to ask if the gentleman is prepared to close. mr. scott: yes, i'm prepared to close. ms. foxx: then we're prepared to and i'll yield to the gentleman. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, madam chair. i yield myself the balance of the time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: madam chair, despite our colleagues' claims the politics over parents act would only further politicize our children's classroom while do nothing to improve relationships between parents and educators. and it will lead to censoring books. last night at the rules committee, a significant amount of time was taken to identify books that ought to be banned and although the bill does not technically directly censor books, it will allow national groups to find books all over the country that they don't like and they could threaten each of those school -- wherever they find the book, they can threaten lawsuits unless the book is actually banned. house democrats tried several times to ensure this legislation would actually address real challenges facing students, parents, and educators and increase parental involvement. for example, democrats offered amendments to prevent this bill from banning books or censuring the curriculum. moreover, in committee, we introduced amendments, access to teacher training. fully fund parent engagement centers. and ensure students have access to mental health resources, among others. unfortunately, they were struck down. moreover, democrats are dedicated to ensuring every child receives a well-funded and accurate education. but this legislation does nothing to achieve that goal but only advance an extreme education agenda at the expense of students and parents. i ask colleagues to oppose h.r. 5 and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. and the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam chair. i yield myself such time as i may consume -- i myself the balance of the time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you. madam chair, i'm -- we heard a lot of about what this bill is going to do in the future. and it's all mad. from the other side. what's been particularly disturbing to me to hear today is -- are comments that truly misrepresent what is in the legislation before us. that scares the public. and that's not what we should be about. this bill is not going to cause people to be mean to schoolchildren. it does not attempt to hurt anyone. it's not going to ban books. our colleagues say on one hand that the list of all books are already available out there to parents, and then they say this bill is going to force those lists to be put out and that will cause the banning of books. we've heard that books have been banned, and in the rules committee last night, books that they said had been banned inappropriately, those ascertainations were refuted. so it has been in the committee markup, in the rules committee, and today, we have heard the terrible misrepresentations about this bill. as my colleagues and i have said, this parents bill of rights is to help parents be more involved with their children's education, as they should be. i am urging my colleagues to support h.r. 5, the parents bill of rights act. by doing so, we'll send a strong message that parents are an integral part of their child's education and must be respected. for too long, parents have been kept at a distance in schools and classrooms. teachers unions and education bureaucrats made significant efforts to conceal what was truly being taught in classrooms. but what came out of covid was parents saw what was being taught and they didn't like it. for years, students were falling behind in critical subject areas such as mathematics and reading, but prolonged school close urd hastened the -- closures hastened the deterioration of learning. now, the parents bill of rights act will foster robust parent-teacher partnerships and close the gap between families and educators. and that's what this bill is about -- setting up true partnerships between families and educators. we respect educators. we want to support what they're doing in the classroom. but parents want to know what's being -- being taught in the classroom. we want transparency. we want accountability. to recover lost learning and promote a safe learning environment, parents must be involved in the classroom. parents are the best advocates for the best interests of their child, and teachers are an important part of enhancing the well-being of students. i hope our colleagues will not continue to misrepresent what is in this bill but will work with us for the benefit of america's children. that's what we're about on our side of the aisle. not to hurt, not to be mean, but to support. again, i encourage my colleagues across the aisle to do what's best for students, support this important bill, and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields. all time for general debate has expired. pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on education and the workforce, printed in the bill, it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the tex of rules -- text of rules committee print 118-2. that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. no amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in house report 118-12. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, by the member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject amendment and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. it is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in house report 118-12. for what purpose does the gentleman from nebraska seek recognition? davis-bacon i have an -- mr. bacon: i have an amendment on the floor. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in house report 118-12 offered by mr. bacon of nebraska. the the chair: the gentleman from nebraska, mr. bacon and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from nebraska. mr. bacon: i rise to offer an amendment. my amendment would add that local education agencies provide the parents the number of school counselors employed at their child's school so parents have a better idea about their child's education and safety during the school day. school counselors play an important role to career and academic development but ahelp children. and this will help if children need additional resources. this can assist our educators in making sure our children are best prepared for school and learning. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment which has support a happy and healthy student empowers our educators and parents deserve to be empowered to get the best help so their children can achieve. with that, i yield back. the chair: yield back or reserve? mr. bacon: i reserve. the chair: the the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. and for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. scott: i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. scott: madam chair, with most bills, this is not an unfunded mandate placed on our schools requiring them to issue another report as a condition for receiving title 1 funds. majority would prefer to impose additional burdens to an already understaffed schools rather than do what they were trained to do and that is teach and work with parents. i would agree with the gentleman's comments about the need for counselors. he is absolutely right. we need more counselors. however this amendment does not increase the number of counselors just reports the number you've got. doesn't improve student mental health. since it doesn't improve mental health or increase the number of counselors, i would oppose the amendment and reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from nebraska. mr. bacon: thank you. this amendment doesn't increase the number of counselors but allows the parents to know if the number of counselors are adequate or not. this is important for parents to have and being requested by teachers and parents. i have received this request to have this added to the bill because they say it will make the bill better. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from nebraska is recognized. mr. bacon: this amendment has support from teachers and parents to have this added in. i yield. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from nebraska. those in favor, say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. and the amendment is agreed to. the gentlewoman from north carolina -- it is now in order to consider amendment number 2 printed in house report 118-12. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: madam chair, i rise in support of my amendment. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2 printed in house report 118-12 offered by ms. foxx of north carolina. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 241, the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. foxx, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from north carolina. ms. foxx: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. foxx: it has been a pleasure to support this bill. i'm proud of the work that our committee has put in to crafting this bill. our committee worked late into the night and early morning and considered dozens of amendments. nearly 20 were adopted to make the bill even better. i am proud we have reported to the floor a commonsense bill that has broad support and alliance with what the vast majority of what americans want. the amendments we did in the committee markup accomplished the same goal we had when writing the bill. protecting parents' rights and making sure that schools can never cut parents out of their children's education decisions. this manager's amendment makes a few minor technical changes to make sure that the amendments we passed during the committee markup will be implemented correctly and that the rights promised are fulfilled. in addition, the manager's amendment adds language to the first amendment sense of congress included in the underlying bill. the new language affirms the fundamental rights of parents to direct the education of their children and encourages courts to use the strict scrutiny standard in evaluating cases related to parental rights. schools should always be accountable to parents and the parent should always know what their children are being taught and what their children are being exposed to. the parents' bill of rights act proabts those fundamental rights. i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of both this amendment and the underlying bill. and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves and the gentleman from virginia -- for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. scott: i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. scott: this is another effort to turn classrooms into the ep shy center of a culture war. this doesn't do anything to actually help students succeed and seeks to scare parents that schools don't have their best interest in heart. children benefit when parents and teachers work together. but this will not take meaningful steps to increase that parental cooperation. the bill would create necessary and burdensome requirements on schools and divert essential resources and personnel from their jobs meeting the families' real needs into reporting and everything else and would dictate what students can and cannot read or learn. this bill distracts from what our public school needs and does nothing to provide the families and the families with real parental engagement as some of the amendments would have done tay were rejected. the bill for example, gives so-called federal right of action to address the school board. well, we know that many school boards in recent years needed police protection to conduct their meetings because of credible threats of violence. these are elected officials. they don't need a federal law to instruct them to be polite. the voters can take care of that. but there's no right that's being given. you already have the right. one thing that is a little concerning is that i have an amendment to allow this right to take place with reasonable limitations. if 100 people show up at a school board meeting, does the school board have to listen to each and every one as long as they want to speak without any limitation? and each one has a federal right of action where they can bring a lawsuit to compel the school board to sit up and listen to each and every one without limitation. if they have heard from 10 or 15 or 20 people on one side of the debate and nobody on the other side. do they have to listen to the other 80? i don't know. that's what the bill suggests. i don't know any jurisdiction where you don't have the right to address the school board in a reasonable way. and that's what this bill does and that's what the manager's amendment does. and so i would ask members to defeat the manager's amendment and the bill. i yield back. the chair: the alyields. and the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: i yield myself the balance of my time. the gentleman from virginia i think will remember that i believe it was the loudoun where the father of a child who had been sexually molested in a bathroom by -- a young boy dressed as a girl who was then transferred to another school and the parents never notified this had happened. and when the father stood up at the school board meeting to bring this issue up, he was not allowed to speak. furthermore, he was arrested. he was wrestled to the ground and arrested. so again, we hear from our colleagues two different scenarios. one, already parents have the right to address their school boards. yes, that's in our first amendment. we have a right to petition our elected officials for grievance dances however, that's not happening, as we have seen in certain places. and whether or not there is a time limit, i would hope that people would be reasonable about that, but we're not dictating that. that will be dealt with. and as the gentleman says, those school board members are elected, and it will be up to them to deal with the public in that respect. and if they don't do it correctly, my assumption is there will be consequences. the manager's amendment again strengthens the underlying bill. i urge its adoption and i urge passage of h.r. 5. with this legislation we have the opportunity to make a stand for the rights of parents. and i hope all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will vote with what they say they believe, which is that parents have rights and that we want to have the best education for children. so join us in this effort. and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from north carolina. those in favor, say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 3 printed in house report 118-12. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from colorado seek recognition? mrs.boebert: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 3 printed in house report 118-12 offered by mrs. boebert of colorado. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 241, the the gentlewoman from colorado, mrs. boebert and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. mrs.boebert: this amendment is simple and straightforward. my amendment simply requires notification to parents if their child's school operates, sponsors or facilitates athletic programs to a person whose biological sex is male to participate in an athletic program or activity that is designated for a biological female. women's sports are under attack. woke policies backed by far left extremists that demand male participation in female sports are delusional and contradicts science. this allows men who identify as women to undermine legitimate women's accomplishments. american women and girls deserve to compete against biological women in sports. opportunities for athletic scholarships and rightful places on the winners' podium without their fear of being sidelined and beat out by a biological male. this was on complete display when william thomas, a biological man, who previously competed in men's swimming stole emma wyatt's first place trophy in the 5-00 yard freestyle final. as a competitor in men's swimming in 2018-19, mr. thomas ranked 445th in the 200-yard freestyle and 65th in the 500-yard freestyle after deciding to compete against women this mediocre mr. thomas ranked fifth in the 200-yard freestyle and won the 500-yard freestyle. he stole emma's championship trophy and took former block swimmer spot in the 2022ncaa division one swim meet. last congress, i led a couple dozen members honoring emma as the rightful winner of the 2022nca mp a division one 500-yard freestyle race. i'm a co-sponsor of h.r. 734, protection of women and girls in sports act of 2023. i refuse to allow our children and grandchildren to be dproomed by big corporations, schools and politicians and to think it's ok for men to compete in women's sports. again, my amendment simply requires notification to parents if their child's school allows males to participate in female-designated sports. i i would hope that parents should know this. with that, madam chair, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from colorado reserves. for what purpose does virginia seek recognition? mr. scott: i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: thank you. madam chair, all school systems are members of athletic leagues. they're dealing with this controversy. they don't need a federal law in higher education. the ncaa is dealing with this. we don't need a federal law to tell local school divisions what to do in all cases. local school divisions are dealing with this. this is controversial. i think we'll do well just to let them work this out. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. and the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. mrs. boebert: thank you, madam chair. i just want to say, we have so many people who see the idiocy in men pretending to be women and stealing opportunities from females. these girls practice their whole lives, sacrifice their bodies with injuries in sports at times and strains only to be outpaced by a male, a biological male. and i think it's very common sense for parents to simply be notified that this is taking place. there is federal funding going to our public schools. and so i do believe that we have some sort of nexus with that if we're going to see this extremism take place in our public schools to at least say parents have a right to know what's going on. and it's not being taken from them. i mean, other than this very simple, commonsense amendment, i'm more in favor of abolishing the department, the federal department of education and getting the federal government completely out of public schools. but we're not there right now and we do fund public schools and there is a mess going on there and our children are hurting and suffering because of it. again, i urge my colleagues to support this simple, commonsense amendment and, madam chair, i yield. the chair: the gentlewoman from colorado yields. and the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: did the gentlelady yield back her time? the chair: she did. she yielded the remainder of her time. mr. scott: thank you. madam chair, as i said, the ncaa is working on this. i just assume rather than disparage trans youth, let them work it out. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from colorado. those in favor say aye. those opposed say no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. -- the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 4 printed in house report 118-12. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from colorado seek recognition? mrs. boebert: madam chair, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 4 printed in house report 118-12 offered by mrs. boebert of colorado. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 241, the gentlewoman from colorado, mrs. boebert, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from colorado. mrs. boebert: mau thank you, madam chair. my amendment would require schools to notify parents if they allow biological males to use restrooms or changing rooms designated for biological females. throughout our debate today, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have continued to mischaracterize this bill as extreme. they harp on the same talking points saying that this bill is looking to ban books, censor curriculums and punish teachers. i'd like any child pornographic book be banned but this is not what we're talking about in this amendment. althe while under democrat control -- all the while under democrat control, we've seen k-12 teach critical race theory, teaching our children to hate our country and to hate their fellow classmates simply because of the color of their skin. they've radical gender ideology and even drag shows to impressionable young children. now, that -- that is what is extreme. even a school in my home state of colorado has even changed a child's gender pronouns as preferred names and kept that information from the child's parents. speaking as a mother of four boys and soon-to-be grandma, enough is enough. i don't send my boys to school to receive indoctrinate from the woke mob or be sexualized by groomers. and if they are, i sure as heck want to know about it and i have the right to speak up. and so do these parents. so let me set the record straight. house republicans want parents to be involved in their child's education. we want to take control back as parents of our children's education rather than leaving it to partisan politicians or unelected bureaucrats. we don't want to send the f.b.i. after them as domestic terrorists. we want to foster an active learning environment, not shut schools down and enforce outdated and unnecessary mask and vaccine mandates on our children. we want children to feel safe at school and not pave the way for school administrative staff to hide a sexual assault from parents like we saw in loudoun county. less than two years ago, about 30 miles from here, a ninth grade girl was sexually assaulted by a man wearing a skirt in the women's restroom at school. this male was allowed to follow the victim into the restroom because of loudoun county public schools inclusive transgender bathroom policies. when the father of the victim came to protest these policies that caused his teenage daughter to be raped, at a school board meeting, he was arrested after an altercation with a woman who said she didn't believe his daughter was raped. the superintendent also defended the school's transgender bathroom policy at that meeting. the man in the skirt was found guilty of two counts of forceable sodomy, a count of anal sodomy and count of forceable flachio and charged with a sexual assault of forestudent -- of a student at another loudoun county school. these inclusive policies have paved a way for sexual predators to use the left's definition of gender to take advantage of their victims. unfortunately, this is just one example of many bological males -- biological males using bathrooms to assault women and children. my amendment would grant parents the right to know schools their children are attending are forcing their children to share vulnerable spaces with potential predators. i urge my colleagues to support my amendment. and with that, madam chair, i reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. scott: madam chair, i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. scott: thank you. thank you, madam chair. i don't think we need a federal law to help schools tell students which bathroom to use. in loudoun county, that situation is under investigation, including criminal charges. i think it's time we stop disparaging trans youth. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. mrs. boebert: madam chair, i yield. the chair: the gentlewoman yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from colorado. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 5 printed in house report 118-12. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from oregon seek recognition? ms. bonamici: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 5 printed in house report 118-12 offered by ms. bon meech eave of -- bonamici of oregon. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 241, ms. bonamici, and a member opposed, will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from oregon. ms. bonamici: thank you, madam chair. i rise today to urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support my amendment in the nature of a substitute to h.r. 5. my amendment in the nature of a substitute is a commonsense piece of legislation that makes tangible investments in parental involvement. and it enhances the ability of school districts to involve all families, not just the privileged few, by adopting this amendment in the nature of a substitute, we will invest in evidence-based, full-service community schools, public schools that coordinate closely with community organizations to improve the integration, accessibility, and effectiveness of services for students and families, to provide families with access to critical wrap-around services and importantly, improve student achievement. we will be able to hire dedicated parent coordinators in public schools to work directly with parents, connect them with the resources and support they need to help their children succeed and ultimately improve parental involvement and student success. we will direct more investments toward the department of education's statewide family engagement centers program so states can share best practices on parental engagement and school districts can receive the support and training they need to increase parental participation and involvement. and colleagues, when i was a very involved parent, i talked to parents who wanted to come to school. they wanted to participate. they were working extra shifts or they didn't speak english. they didn't have transportation. let's break down those barriers. and importantly, we'll prohibit the banning of books and curriculum in public schools and have students receive historically, accurate, well-rounded education. madam chair, i worked on this substitute with stakeholders who are in schools every day, who are parents themselves, and who represent diverse communities in red and blue states across our nation. i'm proud to introduce this amendment in the nature of a substitute for consideration on the house floor because unlike the bill it seeks to amend, it embodies the approach we should be taking to make lasting improvements to public education. an inclusive, collaborative, and evidence-based approach. so on behalf of all students and parents, i encourage all of my colleagues to vote for this amendment and soundly reject h.r. 5, a bill that should be named the politics over parents act. and madam chair, before i yield back or reserve the balance of my time, i want to thank the staff on the education and workforce committee for all of their help with this amendment in the nature of a substitute and also my own staff in my office, dr. garcia, who spent time as a classroom teacher. i want to acknowledge the work of the staff on this as well. and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: thank you, madam chair. i rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. foxx: thank you, madam chair. i yield myself such time. while i appreciate the substitute put forward by the congresswoman, the democratic proposal is wholly inadequate. it will do little to solve the problem that parents face. instead, the democrats' amendment resorts to a tired old democrat strategy -- spend more money, hire more people, and hope for the best. madam chair, parents need more than that. they don't need massive new amendments of taxpayer spending at the federal level controlled by bureaucrats when our country is already deeply in debt. nor do parents need schools to hire massive numbers of new administrators. what parents need is for their rights to be protected. the democrats' substitute does nothing to ensure that parents are the ultimate decisionmakers in their child's education. of course, that shouldn't be a surprise. there's been a push to silence parents around the country. powerful teachers unions, several school boards, democrat poll politicians and the biden justice department have voiced their opposition in their say. fd politiosturing have al-world csequens for rents. formple, in 2021, rhode li talked t elearyole school princalnkingston, rhodeat what was b tght after psient stoalng, th sooisict decte her to felic rords sheid and t teasnion filed a lawsu ast her chef subct tondlesstone arent ould h t goe. througth theocrat ssteouldo nothingonse tt stoes li thier hpenga b the pent'billfig would. ourill would ensure that parents can never bed for currulum.etary o edution migueld op-ed abo theocrat vio his vion,tsho be satisfie when the federal government spes tpayer llars on townolions ab what student lrn,owan th a taugh a how the shoulde protected. at's why i'mroud ttand againshe democrat situteueso ve an in vorf t parent's ll of rights. esve the balan of my ti the speaker o temporehentlemae-- the air: the gentlew resees. thetlewan fro ogons regnized ms. bomici: an y, mam at everygle demrat on r sidf ais, we engageme and talked about tt in t datn t bill and ta aboost, it's m rstaing t the so-calledparents n have aitna fun wl ols our dtrictsndur rers. sileents. nt to ant parents to bnvved. aceful. concns.cesfully ste their sotely and i kwhe rking mr scot talkedut howe tried, mocr to p an endmtn t put somereasonlene i tu at a school board meeting and eachanso speak for two hours, ts notsoe. involvement.y sup parenl engement andgain makdence adveial.ollati, n that's why adversarial. that's why i support the evidence 46 base -- evidence-based approach. i reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman reserve, the gentlewoman from virginia is recognize -- from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: i want to say again the approach our colleagues want to take is to spend more money. ms. solis i mentioned earlier, mr. smith who was mentioned earlier and others did not have the right to peacefully speak to their school boards and get responses. so that is not going to happen under the democrat's amendment. we also are not mean and again we do not ban books. we do not condone the banning of books. so we think again that the substitute presents the perfect picture of republicans and democrats approaches to parent engagement. democrats believe protecting parent's rights means spending more taxpayer dollars to impose a top-down vision. republicans believe in giving parents real power to secure the best education possible for their children. and with that, i will reserve as i believe i have the right to close. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentlewoman from oregon is recognized. ms. bonamici: i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam chair. i want to say again, our bill is meant to give parents their god-given rights to be involved with their children's education and to speak the best education possible. we do not want anyone to be treated unfairly. we want everyone to be treated fairly. we do not ban books. i urge the public to read this bill. it's fairly short. about 30 pages. to make sure where the truth lies. in terms of this piece of legislation. i reject the amendment that has been offered in the nature of a substitute. i urge a no vote on the amendment. and a yes vote on h.r. 5. and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman yields and the gentlewoman -- the question on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from oregon. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. ms. bonamici: i request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18 further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from oregon will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 6 printed in house report 118-12. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? mr. crane: madam speaker, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 6 printed in house report 118-12 offered by mr. crane of arizona. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 241, the gentleman from arizona, mr. crane, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona. mr. crane: -- >> parliamentary inquiry. could you restate the amendment. the chair: amendment number 6. the chair: the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. crane: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. crane: thank you, madam speaker. i think it's pretty sad that we even have to offer this bill and that i have to offer this amendment. but i think the american populace and public realize -- realizes and is completely outraged with what's going on in this country. how they don't feel like they have a voice anymore. how they don't feel like they're being recognized, their rights to be parents and have authority over their own children. it's also very disgusting, quite frankly, what's been going on in our kids' schools and parents across this country -- this country, democrats, republicans, independents, all of us are furious with what's going on in schools. that's why we have to do this. my amendment adds a private right of action for parents to hold schools accountable for not honoring the right set forth in title i and title ii of this bill. it seeks to strengthen enforcement bill of rights. my amendment would ensure parent cans sue if school districts force teachers or students to accommodate critical race theory, compel students to observe observe scene material without parental consent, change pronownts without gender consent or neglect to report sexual assault or harassment on school property. the bill as currently written puts the protection of parental rights in the hands of the department of education bureaucrats. it is not enough for congress to leave enforcement of department of education bureaucrats or wait for the corrupt department of justice to fault -- to file a lawsuit on parents' behalf. i don't trust the biden administration to go after woke schooled in a mrtors that force idea oles on innocent children. parents should have the opportunity to sue these schools. for far too long the public school system has undermined parental involvement in education decisions. if we want to truly empower parents' rights we should give parents the tools to enforce those rights through this amendment, not leave it in the hands of bureaucrats. madam speaker, at this time, i would like to yield one minute to the gentleman, bob good from virginia. excuse me two minutes. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. good: thank you, madam speaker. i support passage of the underlying bill but i also rise in support of this amendment which i think would truly empower parents. adding a private right of action places the ultimate protection of parental rights back where it belongs in the hands of parents, not department of education bureaucrats. for too long the public school system has undermined parental involvement in education decisions and parents have been helpless to hold them accountable. the union-driven covid policies in our schools served as a wakeup call for many parents and school boards across the country have tried to stop them from raising their voices in protest. a private right of action would make a meaningful change to the balance of pow sore parents can rightfully have a say in what their children are being taught. this amendment wouldn't unleash lawsuits against cools, the private right of action could only be used if the school is not forth coming with the commonsense provisions of this bill. if the school shares curriculum, teaching materials and their budget openly, then there's no problem. if the cool notifies parents about actions from the school administrator to change a child's pronoun, there's no standing under this bill. there's also a limit, the private right of action must be filed within 30 days of the action. parental rights precede government. our government was created to protect our god-given rights. when government is working to subvert those right it's the right of the people to put new guardrails in place to secure our precious liberty. guaranteeing a private right of action will ensure our schools are held accountable. i urge support for the amendment. i yield back. chip the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. crane: thank you, madam speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. scott: madam chair, i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. crane: ma -- mr. scott: madam chair, i think the amendment speaks for itself. if 100 parents show up at a school board meet, each demand to be heard for as long as they want to speak, this bill would give them a private right of action in federal court to enforce their right to speak to the school board. now, my local school board limits people to three minutes, i think that's a reasonable limitation. but in -- when the amendment to allow reasonable limitations was defeated, you have the bill that they have everybody has a right, each and every one of the 100 people that show up, no matter how repetitive or how irrelevant, it may be, i just think people need to know what's in the amendment and can judge it for themselves. people have said that some parents have been arrested by the police. for showing up at the school board. and let me tell you that can only happen if the police believe a crime is being committed. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the -- pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from -- the gentleman from arizona will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 7 printed in house report 118-12. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? mr. davidson: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 7 printed in house report 118-12, offered by mr. davidson of ohio. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 241, the gentleman from ohio, mr. davidson, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio. mr. davidson: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. this amendment requires any public school receiving federal funds under title i and title ii of the elementary and secondary education act to hold and open enrollment period, both for students living inside and outside the school district. parents have a right to decide where they child goes to school and this amendment grants parents this important right to choose the best education for their child no matter the zip code. it's important to know this applies to only federal funds. this applies to only local funds. this is only for the federal funds. school choice is critical to not only the parent but also to the student who deserves a safe, high quality education. not indoctrination. we must provide families with freedom to choose. it is the parents' duty to make the best choice for their children. and choice is the ultimate enforcement mechanism for this parents' bill of rights. my amendment also requires that these schools, to post an announcement on their website, with details about the open enrollment period to ensure parents have all the information needed to make an informed decision. such as an application deadline, the approval rate of applications, and how long the enrollment period would be valid. again, giving parents the power and ability to make the most informed decision. under this amendment, schools must give every student that applies via the open enrollment process, quote, a full and fair consideration. an important detail to ensure every student receives the opportunity to succeed. open enrollment and the increase in educational freedom is imperative to the success of our youth. it's a parental right and it's in the best interest of every student to be granted this opportunity. this amendment provides for every single parent with the power to choose. i urge support for my amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. scott: madam chair, i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: thank you. madam chair, i -- i would prefer we fix all of the schools so that all students are provided with an opportunity of a high quality education in a safe and healthy environment, but all this amendment does is gives people the right to scurry around and try to find the best schools. those that are best at identifying the best schools may end up there, but frankly, all this is going to do is cause confusion because when word gets around as to which are the best schools, everybody will want to go to that school. then what? majority's offered the amendment in committee to let parents know that if they can work the system, they may get their child into a good school, but all the rest end up in a school that is dilapidated, unaccredited, or other wise undesirable. we need to work to improve all of the schools, not figure out a scheme where some can figure out how to get their child into a good school and leave everyone else behind. i would oppose the amendment and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. the question is on the amendment offer by the gentleman from ohio. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment -- the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. purr pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the the gentleman from ohio will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 8 printed in house report 118-12. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. fitzpatrick: i seek to recognize for one minute. the chair: does the gentleman have an amendment? mr. fitzpatrick: i have meask. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 8 printed in house report number 118-12, offered by mr. fitzpatrick of pennsylvania. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 241, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. fitzpatrick, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. fitzpatrick: thank you. i rise today in favor of my amendment designated as amendment 8 to h.r. 5, the parents bill of rights. we have a responsibility to be mindful of the costs and implementation of this bill on our schools, parents shall and communities. my amendment would require the g.a.o. report on the impact of this legislation. our priority must be to set our children up for success. giving parents the transparency and voice they deserve in their child's education. it also means making the federal government answer both to the potential cost of this bill on state and local educational agencies and individual schools throughout our nation. we have made a commitment to our constituents to demand more dwibility from their government and use of their taxpayer dollars, as well as to safeguard a better future for the next generation of americans. my amendment will guarantee we keep that promise. with that i urge the amendment's option, i reserve the balance of -- option, i reserve thebalanc. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. scott: madam chair, i ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition although i am not opposed. the chair: without objection. the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: thank you. madam speaker, i support the amendment because the g.a.o. report will actually expose the legislation for what it is. it's a waste of money. it will provide no meaningful rights. and it will adversely affected education of the children. i support the amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. and the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. fitzpatrick: i yield back. the chair: the the gentleman yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from pennsylvania. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. >> i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from pennsylvania will be postponed. ms. foxx: do now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. all those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: madam chair. >> madam speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union having had under consideration h.r. 5, directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 5 and has come to no resolution thereon. pursuant to section 4 of house resolution 199, the unfinished business is the further consideration of the veto message of the president on house joint resolution 30. the clerk will report the title of the joint resolution. the clerk: house joint resolution 30. joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5 united states code of the rules submitted by the department of labor relating to prudence and loyalty in selecting plan investments and exercising chair shareholder rights. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house on reconsideration pass the joint resolution. the objections of the president to the contrary notwithstanding. the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. foxx, is recognized for one hour. miss forks: thank you -- ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. i rise in support of overriding president biden's veto of h.j.res. 30, a congressional review act resolution nullifying the biden administration's attempt to politicize the retirement savings of americans. this is deja vu for the american people. with his veto the president once again insists on undermining the financial security of the very people who elected him. republicans will stand with american workers and retirees in protecting their savings. it puts the future of millions of americans in jeopardy when they are already facing economic hardships and inflation brought on by this administration's reckless spending. the president says h.j.res. 30 would make it, quote, illegal to consider risk factors. but that statement is blatantly false and misleading. the trump rule, which h.j.res. 30 would reinstate, explicitly states, quote, nothing in the final rule is intended to or does prevent a fiduciary from appropriately considering any material risk with respect to an investment, end quote. last year the department of labor, d.o.l., published a rule encouraging retirement plan fiduciaries to consider e.s.g. factors when making investment decisions. biden protected this rule with his veto -- with his veto. now thanks to democrats workers can be placed into e.s.g. investment vehicles by default. and in a fiduciary finds two investments are equal, they are allowed to use collateral e.s.g. factors to break the tie without justifying or documenting that decision. this is especially concerning since e.s.g. investments often underperform and are riskier than other investment strategies. the left is using e.s.g. investment criteria as a political tool to cudgel companies into accepting leftist policies. if we do not override this veto, the left will use e.s.g. investing to push nonclient companies out of the marketplace. congress debated and it came to the bipartisan conclusion to overturn the biden rule. now the administration persists through executive fiat. americans invest to secure their future. not to fund the green new deal or leftist pet projects. that's why i supported the resolution to nullify the biden administration's destructive rule. i urge my colleagues to quit playing petty politics and vote in accordance with the best interest of the american people. madam speaker, for purposes of debate only i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from virginia, the ranking member of the committee on education and the work force, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentlelady for yielding. madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: i rise in opposition to the house republican majority's effort to override president biden's veto message on h.j. -- president biden's veto of h.j.res. 30. this resolution sought to nullify a popular and sensible rule that enabled retirement plan managers to make fully informed investment decisions. i commend the president for his veto. workers should be able to invest their retirement savings in a way that reflects their values such as combating climate change without sacrificing investment returns. that's why the biden-harris administration issued a rule to clarify the retirement plan managers may consider the economic effect of climate change and other environmental, social, and government factors or e.s.g. factors, when they make investment decisions for participants in retirement plans. simply put, this rule is not an e.s.g. mandate, it's just -- it just allows participants to make those decisions. additionally, the rule does not change a fiduciary standard to which the professionals who make the decisions for retirement plans are bound. they must still prioritize the interest of retirement plan participants and cannot sacrifice investment returns to pursue e.s.g. goals. today's debate is not a referendum on the add m.'s rule or e.s.g. in general. we had that debate last month. the debate is about one thing, first, it's about arithmetic. as my colleagues know overriding the president's veto requires the support of 2/3, or 290 members of the house. h.r. res. 30 passed the house with 216 vote, nearly all ofry came from the republican caucus. anyone who can count knows that the republican majority will not have the votes to override the president's veto. everyone should be asking why are we

Related Keywords

Louisiana ,United States ,Acton ,Minnesota ,California ,Connecticut ,Arizona ,Massachusetts ,New York ,Georgia ,North Carolina ,Texas ,Missouri ,Washington ,Kentucky ,Loudoun County ,Virginia ,Florida ,Illinois ,Wisconsin ,Togo ,Oregon ,Michigan ,Mississippi ,Denver ,Colorado ,Sandyhook ,Nebraska ,Houston ,Maryland ,Pennsylvania ,Ohio ,Utah ,Americans ,America ,American ,Martin Luther King Jr ,Wasserman Schultz ,Ann Frank ,Los Angeles ,William Thomas ,Jackson Lee ,Nelson Mandela ,Luther King Jr ,Harry Potter ,Tony Morrison ,George Orwell ,Roberto Clemente ,